Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 689
Filter
1.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 43(7): 834-839, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2185189

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: An accurate estimate of the average number of hand hygiene opportunities per patient hour (HHO rate) is required to implement group electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems (GEHHMSs). We sought to identify predictors of HHOs to validate and implement a GEHHMS across a network of critical care units. DESIGN: Multicenter, observational study (10 hospitals) followed by quality improvement intervention involving 24 critical care units across 12 hospitals in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Critical care patient beds were randomized to receive 1 hour of continuous direct observation to determine the HHO rate. A Poisson regression model determined unit-level predictors of HHOs. Estimates of average HHO rates across different types of critical care units were derived and used to implement and evaluate use of GEHHMS. RESULTS: During 2,812 hours of observation, we identified 25,417 HHOs. There was significant variability in HHO rate across critical care units. Time of day, day of the week, unit acuity, patient acuity, patient population and use of transmission-based precautions were significantly associated with HHO rate. Using unit-specific estimates of average HHO rate, aggregate HH adherence was 30.0% (1,084,329 of 3,614,908) at baseline with GEHHMS and improved to 38.5% (740,660 of 1,921,656) within 2 months of continuous feedback to units (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Unit-specific estimates based on known predictors of HHO rate enabled broad implementation of GEHHMS. Further longitudinal quality improvement efforts using this system are required to assess the impact of GEHHMS on both HH adherence and clinical outcomes within critically ill patient populations.


Subject(s)
Cross Infection , Hand Hygiene , Critical Care , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Electronics , Guideline Adherence , Humans , Infection Control , Ontario
2.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 43(6): 687-713, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2185241

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this document is to highlight practical recommendations to assist acute care hospitals to prioritize and implement strategies to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), ventilator-associated events (VAE), and non-ventilator hospital-acquired pneumonia (NV-HAP) in adults, children, and neonates. This document updates the Strategies to Prevent Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Acute Care Hospitals published in 2014. This expert guidance document is sponsored by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology (SHEA), and is the product of a collaborative effort led by SHEA, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Hospital Association, the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, and The Joint Commission, with major contributions from representatives of a number of organizations and societies with content expertise.


Subject(s)
Cross Infection , Healthcare-Associated Pneumonia , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated , Pneumonia , Adult , Child , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Healthcare-Associated Pneumonia/epidemiology , Healthcare-Associated Pneumonia/prevention & control , Hospitals , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infection Control , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/prevention & control , Ventilators, Mechanical/adverse effects
3.
Hypertension ; 76(5): 1368-1383, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2153222

ABSTRACT

Telemedicine allows the remote exchange of medical data between patients and healthcare professionals. It is used to increase patients' access to care and provide effective healthcare services at a distance. During the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telemedicine has thrived and emerged worldwide as an indispensable resource to improve the management of isolated patients due to lockdown or shielding, including those with hypertension. The best proposed healthcare model for telemedicine in hypertension management should include remote monitoring and transmission of vital signs (notably blood pressure) and medication adherence plus education on lifestyle and risk factors, with video consultation as an option. The use of mixed automated feedback services with supervision of a multidisciplinary clinical team (physician, nurse, or pharmacist) is the ideal approach. The indications include screening for suspected hypertension, management of older adults, medically underserved people, high-risk hypertensive patients, patients with multiple diseases, and those isolated due to pandemics or national emergencies.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Hypertension/drug therapy , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Blood Pressure Determination/methods , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Disease Management , Evidence-Based Medicine , Female , Humans , Hypertension/diagnosis , Italy , Male , Occupational Health , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Patient Safety , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Severity of Illness Index
4.
PLoS One ; 17(11): e0272919, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2140469

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Hospital-acquired infections of communicable viral diseases (CVDs) have been posing a tremendous challenge to healthcare workers globally. Healthcare personnel (HCP) is facing a consistent risk of viral infections, and subsequently higher rates of morbidity and mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We proposed a domain-knowledge-driven infection risk model to quantify the individual HCP and the population-level risks. For individual-level risk estimation, a time-variant infection risk model is proposed to capture the transmission dynamics of CVDs. At the population-level, the infection risk is estimated using a Bayesian network model constructed from three feature sets, including individual-level factors, engineering control factors, and administrative control factors. For model validation, we investigated the case study of the Coronavirus disease, in which the individual-level and population-level infection risk models were applied. The data were collected from various sources such as COVID-19 transmission databases, health surveys/questionaries from medical centers, U.S. Department of Labor databases, and cross-sectional studies. RESULTS: Regarding the individual-level risk model, the variance-based sensitivity analysis indicated that the uncertainty in the estimated risk was attributed to two variables: the number of close contacts and the viral transmission probability. Next, the disease transmission probability was computed using a multivariate logistic regression applied for a cross-sectional HCP data in the UK, with the 10-fold cross-validation accuracy of 78.23%. Combined with the previous result, we further validated the individual infection risk model by considering six occupations in the U.S. Department of Labor O*Net database. The occupation-specific risk evaluation suggested that the registered nurses, medical assistants, and respiratory therapists were the highest-risk occupations. For the population-level risk model validation, the infection risk in Texas and California was estimated, in which the infection risk in Texas was lower than that in California. This can be explained by California's higher patient load for each HCP per day and lower personal protective equipment (PPE) sufficiency level. CONCLUSION: The accurate estimation of infection risk at both individual level and population levels using our domain-knowledge-driven infection risk model will significantly enhance the PPE allocation, safety plans for HCP, and hospital staffing strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Virus Diseases , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Bayes Theorem , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Personnel, Hospital , Hospitals , Delivery of Health Care
5.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 11(1): 131, 2022 11 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2139415

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The spread of SARS-CoV-2, multidrug-resistant organisms and other healthcare-associated pathogens represents supra-regional challenges for infection prevention and control (IPC) specialists in every European country. To tackle these problems, cross-site research collaboration of IPC specialists is very important. This study assesses the extent and quality of national research collaborations of IPC departments of university hospitals located in Austria, England, France, Germany, and the Netherlands, identifies network gaps, and provides potential solutions. METHODS: Joint publications of IPC heads of all university hospitals of the included countries between 1st of June 2013 until 31st of May 2020 were collected by Pubmed/Medline search. Further, two factors, the journal impact factor and the type/position of authorship, were used to calculate the Scientific Collaboration Impact (SCI) for all included sites; nationwide network analysis was performed. RESULTS: In five European countries, 95 sites and 125 responsible leaders for IPC who had been in charge during the study period were identified. Some countries such as Austria have only limited national research cooperations, while the Netherlands has established a gapless network. Most effective collaborating university site of each country were Lille with an SCI of 1146, Rotterdam (408), Berlin (268), Sussex (204), and Vienna/Innsbruck (18). DISCUSSION: The present study indicates major differences and room for improvement in IPC research collaborations within each country and underlines the potential and importance of collaborating in IPC.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Humans , Cross Infection/prevention & control , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Infection Control , Europe/epidemiology
6.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 11(1): 127, 2022 10 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2139414

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene is universally recognized as a cornerstone measure for the prevention of healthcare-associated infections. Although the WHO "My five Moments for hand hygiene" poster has been used for more than a decade to delineate hand hygiene indications and promote action, adherence levels among healthcare workers are still notoriously low and disquieting. To compensate for the lack of effective hand hygiene communication, we aimed to evaluate emojis as possible surrogates for the non-verbal aspects of hand hygiene behaviour. METHODS: Following a thorough review of the Unicode version 12.0, the most applicable emojis to the terms used in the WHO 5 Moments poster were extracted. We developed a self-administered questionnaire to assess the view of infection prevention and control (IPC) practitioners regarding the use of emojis to show the WHO 5 Moments. Completed questionnaires were collected and analysed to determine the suitability of the existing emojis to illustrate a unified emoji poster. Data were analysed using R (version 3.6.3). RESULTS: A total of 95 IPC practitioners completed the questionnaire from May to October 2019 from different countries. Of these, 69 (74%) were female, and the mean age of the participants was 44.6 ± 10.87 years. We found appropriate emojis for six of the words used in the poster, including for touching (72%), for patient (63%), for clean (53%), for procedure (56%), for body fluid (58%), and for exposure risk (71%). The existing emojis proposed for the words "hygiene", "aseptic", and "surrounding" seemed to be less satisfactory. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, the findings of this study indicate that the existing emojis may not be able to substitute the words used in the WHO 5 Moments poster. Emojis might be helpful to address hand hygiene indications in healthcare that may eventually play a role in promoting this measure. However, emojis should be further studied to choose the most appropriate ones and avoid ambiguity and misinterpretation. More emojis to convey health related messages are needed. We recommend further research in this area to evaluate the effect of using emojis in healthcare-related behaviours.


Subject(s)
Cross Infection , Hand Hygiene , Female , Humans , Adult , Middle Aged , Male , Hand Hygiene/methods , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Delivery of Health Care , World Health Organization
7.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 22(1): 1416, 2022 Nov 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2139269

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The states of IPC (Infection Prevention and Control) is serious under the COVID-19 pandemic. Nosocomial infection reporting is of great significance to transparent management of IPC in regard to the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to explore the relationship between communication openness and nosocomial infection reporting, explore the mediating effect of team cohesion in the two, and provide evidence-based organizational perspective for improving IPC management in the hospitals. METHOD: A questionnaire was used to collect data on communication openness, team cohesion and nosocomial infection reporting in 3512 medical staff from 239 hospitals in Hubei, China. Structural Equation Model (SEM) was conducted to examine the hypothetical model. RESULT: Communication openness was positively related to nosocomial infection reporting (ß = 0.540, p < 0.001), and was positively related to team cohesion (ß = 0.887, p < 0.001). Team cohesion was positively related to nosocomial infection reporting (ß = 0.328, p < 0.001). The partial mediating effect of team cohesion was significant (ß = 0.291, SE = 0.055, 95% CI = [ 0.178,0.392 ]), making up 35.02% of total effect. CONCLUSION: Communication openness was not only positively related to nosocomial infection reporting. Team cohesion can be regarded as a mediator between communication openness and nosocomial infection reporting. It implies that strengthening communication openness and team cohesion is the strategy to promote IPC management from the new organizational perspective.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Humans , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Pandemics , Communication , Surveys and Questionnaires
8.
BMJ Open Qual ; 11(4)2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2137806

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Healthcare-associated infection (HAI) prevention has been difficult for healthcare providers to maintain during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study summarises themes for maintaining infection prevention activities learnt from the implementation of a quality improvement (QI) programme during the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted qualitative analysis of participants' semistructured exit interviews, self-assessments on HAI prevention activities, participant-created action plans, chat-box discussions during webinars and informal correspondence. SETTING: Intensive care units (ICUs) with elevated rates of central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) and/or catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) participating in the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Programme for ICUs: Preventing CLABSI and CAUTI. RESULTS: Forty-nine ICU teams who participated in the programme between December 2019 and April 2021 found ways to maintain activities such as daily huddles, multidisciplinary rounds, and central line and indwelling urinary catheter monitoring despite barriers, including staff turnover, a lack of time, staff fatigue and pandemic-related guidelines limiting providers' time around patients. We use four themes to summarise the ICU teams' adaptations that allowed them to sustain infection prevention activities: (1) Units had CLABSI and CAUTI prevention teams, policies and practices established prior to the pandemic; (2) Units were flexible in their implementation of those policies and practices; (3) Units maintained consistent buy-in for and engagement in HAI prevention activities among both leadership and care teams throughout the pandemic and (4) Units looked to learn from other units in their facility and beyond. CONCLUSIONS: Future shocks such as the pandemic must be anticipated, and the healthcare system must be resilient to the resulting disruptions to HAI prevention activities. This study encountered four themes for successful maintenance of infection prevention activities during the current pandemic: the value of a pre-existing infection prevention infrastructure; a flexibility in approach; broad buy-in for maintaining QI programmes and the facilitation of idea-sharing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Catheter-Related Infections , Cross Infection , Urinary Tract Infections , Humans , Catheter-Related Infections/prevention & control , Catheter-Related Infections/epidemiology , Infection Control/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Quality Improvement , Intensive Care Units , Urinary Tract Infections/prevention & control , Cross Infection/prevention & control
9.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 836, 2022 Nov 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2119375

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has raised awareness of infection prevention and control. We found that the incidence of nosocomial infection in neurosurgery has changed. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of "coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prevention and control measures" on nosocomial infections in neurosurgery. METHODS: To explore changes in nosocomial infections in neurosurgery during the COVID-19 pandemic, the clinical data of inpatients undergoing neurosurgery at Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province between January 1 and April 30, 2020 (COVID-19 era) were first analyzed and then compared with those from same period in 2019 (first pre-COVID-19 era). We also analyzed data between May 1 and December 31, 2020 (post-COVID-19 era) at the same time in 2019 (second pre-COVID-19 era). RESULTS: The nosocomial infection rate was 7.85% (54/688) in the first pre-COVID-19 era and 4.30% (26/605) in the COVID-19 era (P = 0.01). The respiratory system infection rate between the first pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 eras was 6.1% vs. 2.0% (P < 0.01), while the urinary system infection rate was 1.7% vs. 2.0% (P = 0.84). Between the first pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 eras, respiratory system and urinary infections accounted for 77.78% (42/54) vs. 46.15% (12/26) and 22.22% (12/54) vs. 46.15% (12/26) of the total nosocomial infections, respectively (P < 0.01). Between the second pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 eras, respiratory system and urinary accounted for 53.66% (44/82) vs. 40.63% (39/96) and 24.39% (20/82) vs. 40.63% (39/96) of the total nosocomial infections, respectively (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of nosocomial infections in neurosurgery reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic. The reduction was primarily observed in respiratory infections, while the proportion of urinary infections increased significantly.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Neurosurgery , Respiratory Tract Infections , Urinary Tract Infections , Humans , Cross Infection/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Tertiary Care Centers , Urinary Tract Infections/epidemiology , Urinary Tract Infections/complications , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , China/epidemiology
10.
Euro Surveill ; 27(40)2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2114752

ABSTRACT

BackgroundCompliance with infection prevention and control (IPC) measures is critical to preventing COVID-19 transmission in healthcare settings.AimTo identify and explain factors influencing compliance with COVID-19-specific IPC measures among healthcare workers (HCWs) in long-term care facilities (LTCF) in Finland.MethodsThe study included a web-based survey and qualitative study based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). The link to the anonymous survey was distributed via email to LTCFs through regional IPC experts in December 2020. Outcome was modelled using ordinary logistic regression and penalised ridge logistic regression using regrouped explanatory variables and an original, more correlated set of explanatory variables, respectively. In-depth interviews were conducted among survey participants who volunteered during January-March 2021. Data were analysed thematically using qualitative data analysis software (NVIVO12).ResultsA total of 422 HCWs from 17/20 regions responded to the survey. Three TDF domains were identified that negatively influenced IPC compliance: environmental context and resources, reinforcement and beliefs about capabilities. Twenty HCWs participated in interviews, which resulted in identification of several themes: changes in professional duties and lack of staff planning for emergencies (domain: environmental context and resources); management culture and physical absence of management (domain: reinforcement), knowledge of applying IPC measures, nature of tasks and infrastructure that supports implementation (domain: beliefs about capabilities), that explained how the domains negatively influenced their IPC behaviour.ConclusionsThis study provides insights into behavioural domains that can be used in developing evidence-based behaviour change interventions to support HCW compliance with pandemic-specific IPC measures in LTCFs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Finland/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control
11.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(6): 653-658, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2096425

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The pressures exerted by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic pose an unprecedented demand on healthcare services. Hospitals become rapidly overwhelmed when patients requiring life-saving support outpace available capacities. OBJECTIVE: We describe methods used by a university hospital to forecast case loads and time to peak incidence. METHODS: We developed a set of models to forecast incidence among the hospital catchment population and to describe the COVID-19 patient hospital-care pathway. The first forecast utilized data from antecedent allopatric epidemics and parameterized the care-pathway model according to expert opinion (ie, the static model). Once sufficient local data were available, trends for the time-dependent effective reproduction number were fitted, and the care pathway was reparameterized using hazards for real patient admission, referrals, and discharge (ie, the dynamic model). RESULTS: The static model, deployed before the epidemic, exaggerated the bed occupancy for general wards (116 forecasted vs 66 observed), ICUs (47 forecasted vs 34 observed), and predicted the peak too late: general ward forecast April 9 and observed April 8 and ICU forecast April 19 and observed April 8. After April 5, the dynamic model could be run daily, and its precision improved with increasing availability of empirical local data. CONCLUSIONS: The models provided data-based guidance for the preparation and allocation of critical resources of a university hospital well in advance of the epidemic surge, despite overestimating the service demand. Overestimates should resolve when the population contact pattern before and during restrictions can be taken into account, but for now they may provide an acceptable safety margin for preparing during times of uncertainty.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospital Bed Capacity , Hospitals, University/organization & administration , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Forecasting , Germany/epidemiology , Hospitals, University/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Models, Statistical , Patient Safety
14.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 41(10): 1127-1135, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2096357

ABSTRACT

To understand hospital policies and practices as the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated, the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) conducted a survey through the SHEA Research Network (SRN). The survey assessed policies and practices around the optimization of personal protection equipment (PPE), testing, healthcare personnel policies, visitors of COVID-19 patients in relation to procedures, and types of patients. Overall, 69 individual healthcare facilities responded in the United States and internationally, for a 73% response rate.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Health Policy , Infection Control/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Health Personnel/organization & administration , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
15.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 41(7): 820-825, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2096308

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Patients with COVID-19 may present with respiratory syndromes indistinguishable from those caused by common viruses. Early isolation and containment is challenging. Although screening all patients with respiratory symptoms for COVID-19 has been recommended, the practicality of such an effort has yet to be assessed. METHODS: Over a 6-week period during a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, our institution introduced a "respiratory surveillance ward" (RSW) to segregate all patients with respiratory symptoms in designated areas, where appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) could be utilized until SARS-CoV-2 testing was done. Patients could be transferred when SARS-CoV-2 tests were negative on 2 consecutive occasions, 24 hours apart. RESULTS: Over the study period, 1,178 patients were admitted to the RSWs. The mean length-of-stay (LOS) was 1.89 days (SD, 1.23). Among confirmed cases of pneumonia admitted to the RSW, 5 of 310 patients (1.61%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. This finding was comparable to the pickup rate from our isolation ward. In total, 126 HCWs were potentially exposed to these cases; however, only 3 (2.38%) required quarantine because most used appropriate PPE. In addition, 13 inpatients overlapped with the index cases during their stay in the RSW; of these 13 exposed inpatients, 1 patient subsequently developed COVID-19 after exposure. No patient-HCW transmission was detected despite intensive surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: Our institution successfully utilized the strategy of an RSW over a 6-week period to contain a cluster of COVID-19 cases and to prevent patient-HCW transmission. However, this method was resource-intensive in terms of testing and bed capacity.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Cross Infection/transmission , Infection Control/methods , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Occupational Diseases/prevention & control , Patient Isolation , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Population Surveillance/methods , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Cross Infection/diagnosis , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Early Diagnosis , Female , Humans , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patients' Rooms/organization & administration , Personal Protective Equipment , Pneumonia/virology , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Singapore , Symptom Assessment , Tertiary Care Centers
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL